Flex work request denied- appeal

[Namechange1234589]

Hi I am after some advice regarding my appeal letter for the rejection of my recent flexible working request. I asked to return from my 2nd maternity leave on 0.7 hours which has been rejected with no counter offer made or any discussion at all with employer offered to explore other options.
After my first mat leave I returned to this same.role 0.8. Once my eldest began receiving her 30 free hours I returned to full time work for a few months before commencing my second maternity leave.
During the time I worked this role 0.8 there were never any complaints from employer or line manager nor any other colleagues or stakeholders (that I am aware of) and I believed I was doing a great job and still do.
Since submitting my flex work request I was informed by a colleague (also currently on mat leave) that she had been told by her line manager that someone at senior level told her line manager the top dog no longer wants anyone working the role my colleague and I work part time. Both she and I have previously worked the role 0.8 as well as full time.
There are only 7 of us who work this role within the business. 6 of us are female. Having looked at Unison guidance it seems that if the boss is unofficial taking a blanket approach to the working pattern our role can do the this could be indirect sex discrimination? The issue of course is that in rejection letter the boss has listed detriment to quality of provision for 3 separate things as reason for rejection.

The appeal will go straight to the CEO of business. Should I include in my letter that I am concerned my request wasn't fairly considered because it seems anecdotally the boss has told the senior team that he doesn't wish anyone in this role to be part time anymore? Or because I only have anecdotal evidence of this being said ( although it has come from a trusted source) should I leave it out entirely and not mention at all in the appeal meeting either?
My DH says don't put it in writing as it will look like I am a sour grapes person spreading gossip.
I genuinely feel this is discrimination though and how else do I prove it without notifying the CEO of this comment?

Thanks if you've made it to end of this post!

@unfunfortunateevents I originally was promoted to the role as a full time position. Then post mat leave 1 returned 0.8. Worked 2.5 years 0.8, then moved back to full time for 3 months ahead of mat leave 2.

You could say that about any full time role. I assume you still get teacher holidays which mean that those with school age children still reap that benefit (and before I get flamed I'm the child of a teacher and I know my mum still worked during holidays etc)

I'm sorry but if they feel their business reason to make this role full time is valid then you don't have much of a case.

You could say you just want to do the teaching role and not the extra responsibility.

Ok, so I don't have any detailed knowledge of HR but I am in a very similar position job wise. A couple of years before I went on maternity leave some staff in same job (HOD) were allowed to come back from mat leave part time (0.8) and when I asked for the same it was approved. I think this is a complete bargain for the school as I do 100% of my responsibility for 80% of the teaching pay AND responsibility pay! I just work more late at night now/basically my working practices are quite different. I'm much more efficient. Your head is silly, and as you say they should do everything to retain good staff at the moment, but I don't think before there was really much people could do in my school when they were forced to choose between part time and their responsibility. Are you pastoral? I think this means they will be able to easily justify that there is more need now etc. Obviously though as I said I don't really know how this works from ab HR perspective. I'm really sorry, it sounds rubbish. What is the timetabling situation for next year? Does you losing a class make it really hard for them? Has your head taken this stance because there are others doing the same set up who are underperforming? Again not your problem. Can you look for a new school?

I think you need to consider the wider implications to the school that might be influencing the headteacher. @Birdwitted mentioned a number of them such as timetabling issues, (losing a class, having to share a class) other part time posts not working as well, more input needed post pandemic. ...I would also say that you have chopped and changed a bit in what you are willing to work for example coming back full time to protect maternity leave payments and then wanting to drop hours again - all perfectly reasonable but senior management might have a different view making them less supportive now.

@birdwitted Yes pastoral.
It is absolutely infuriating to me that I worked my arse off to secure a role in a leadership position that I am very successful in and as a result of having the audacity to produce offspring I am now going to likely be forced to relinquish the leadership role or find a new place of work or keeping leadership role and get into debt paying for childcare whilst looking elsewhere. This right here is precisely the reason why there is such a huge disparity between number of female secondary teachers vs how many females make it to senior leadership compared to male stats. It's 2022 for fucks sake.

I accept there is higher need for pastoral support for students however in my role im more co-ordinator of said support as opposed to provider if that makes sense. And like you say @birdwitted when you work 0.8 you still put in full time hours except from home
And that's exactly what I ended up doing but I was OK with that because.it meant I got more time with my DC and saved some money not needing an additional day of childcare a week. To my mind the job share is actually a very good deal- they get 0.2 of my pay but the buck still stops with me if shit hits fan, I do all the strategic planning, data analysis, complex cases with families.and external agencies, external agency referral forms, attendance stuff and SEN stuff. They are essentially needed to be the body in school who blows the whistle at morning line up, checks the detention list, picks up any serious incidents that day and is the person parents/carers will be put through to on phone if they call and need to speak to someone from the year team. Being out of school one day a week didn't stop my inbox still receiving approx 100 emails in it on day I was off and I was still expected to pick up all that work the following day so really my workload was never reduced to 0.8. I accepted this as the trade off for flex working though.

And yes, I will look for a new school. A full time job, more money and senior leadership has just come up locally to me so think I will apply for that. If I am to be forced back full time it may as well be for more money and a promotion. And I look forward to seeing how the school fares replacing my job because during my mat leave an equivalent role.to mine became vacant and they had 2 applicants. Neither of the people currently covering mine and my colleague's mat leaves applied which to me screams volumes. They had the chance to apply for a permanent role of what they're doing now as mat covers and they didn't. I.
Wonder. Why....

How did you get it agreed to go back full time for just 3 months before going on MAT leave? I am impressed they agreed to this!

It does sound like they feel you need to be full time. I've a friend who has similar in teaching recently return from mat requesting 0.8 and ended up working full time to keep up so she has gone back full time. It's such a hard industry to flex work in.

@Legoisaws8om I made the request when I was 5 weeks pregnant following MC at start of year. So they obviously weren't aware. I would have made the request whether I was pregnant or not because financially we couldn't justify me not being full time once DCs 30 hours came through. And obviously I had no idea whether the pregnancy would work out or go the way of the one back in Jan.

Yeah this seems quite short sighted from your head, I'm sorry. I'm not sure whether this is good HR advice, but is it worth having an honest chat with them and asking why the change, and what implications this has for you? 4 Days is the worst of both worlds in teaching I think because noone treats you as PT - especially if you have a leadership role/communication with parents, as you say, and come back to a very full inbox before you start anything. When I asked whether you could look for a new job, I didn't mean that this was in any way ok, but more that if you're going to be FT anyway, why not maybe ply your trade in a more senior job for a head who might appreciate you more. I know there are lots of reasons to stay put with two small children though. I also totally agree that this would seem like a good set up if you have a deputy, and in terms of provision I just meant with pastoral stuff and pandemic that you might not get anywhere with a formal claim as they have justification, not that the justification was reasonable. With pastoral stuff hours worked are obviously important but judgement and experience are invaluable - as you say, they should be bending over backwards to keep you! Heads' judgement though about they should and should not bend over backwards to keep isn't always great....

OP I think you are looking to drop a day, but even when you did this you actually still worked FT hours doing emails etc.

Have you asked if you could work FT but do compressed hours I.e. 5 days over 4. Their argument is the role is FT, but flexible working is not just hours but also when and where you work. By suggesting FT over 4 days I.e. , one day with no teaching/F2F duties you could pick up emails, do lesson planning, management duties etc. in the evenings on the 4 days you work. You did this last time so why not get paid for it. Note: suggest the Non- working day is a Tue, Wed, Thur as this may go down better.

I would also add in the development opportunity for your deputy as a business benefit.

To be perfectly honest, I expect it was quite infuriating to them to have someone go back to full time whilst knowing they were pregnant just to get more maternity pay. Perhaps you shot yourself in the foot.

My previous comments stand, that they cannot make a blanket statement about never allowing part time and I think you can legitimately raise that. But I am also not surprised they are not exactly bending over backwards to accommodate you. I am a manager too and truthfully, I wouldn’t accommodate you either if you tried that with me, but I would keep it within the law.

If you applied last September I think they are only obliged to look into one request a year but that might be wrong.

From all your posts, I can see exactly why reduced hours are not possible for the role. I get that you think they are, and that it's challenging to manage childcare, small children & f/t work (been there!) but from your description, I can see why it needs to be f/t

In my own role, I manage a team, and it has to be f/t.

I have a number of p/t or reduced hours staff on my team, and that's fine, but from a management perspective, it's really challenging, and certainly makes delivering work harder.

That said, I would continue to challenge it & see if there's any accommodation that's reached. I wouldn't mention the discrimination aspect nor the hearsay.

To be perfectly honest, I expect it was quite infuriating to them to have someone go back to full time whilst knowing they were pregnant just to get more maternity pay. Perhaps you shot yourself in the foot
I agree. Within the rules but not within the spirit of the rules.

OP, does the deputy who has to job share with you have a choice in the matter? Maybe the business need is that it is getting difficult finding people willing to take the extra workload on (even with the extra pay) - the same way as you want to work less even if it means less money?

Year Leaders not P/T? Absolutely get it. Nothing discriminatory about it. Looks like they tried it. Didn't work. They are not going back there.

We have a P/T year leader - it is an absolute ball ache. The deputy isn't in the know.

You need a year leader to be there. The kick off/parent phone call/pastoral issue that needs dealing with does sometimes need to be done on the day. And a 1 day a week deputy will not necessarily have the full background.

Shot myself in foot by making a request I would have made whether I was pregnant or not...? It was a request made from financial need at that time. I was not to know whether I would end up with a second miscarriage or whether pregnancy would pan out. From your perspective as a manager what should I have done? Continued part time from September despite no longer having a need to due to DC1 30 free hours just in case pregnancy did work out? What if it hadn't have done? My request was made when 5 weeks pregnant. I didn't have a crystal ball.

@jimmy I could accept it didn't work if that was actually the case. Totally different kettle of fish if, at any point over the 2.5 years I was part time, they had raised any issues with me. Fact is they never did. So either they're shit at performance managing me and let me blunder along for 2.5 years or- as I believe to be the case- it worked more than well.

The deputies I have worked with have been more than capable of stepping up to deal with any parent 'kicking off'. At best they resolve the issue and at worst they listen to parent complaint, offer suggestions and if no resolution can be found let parent know I will call following day. Simple.

@lovely this is a fair point. Not one they've outlined or communicated to me though. Would they not just say that if that was the case?

Oh dear Op. I hope you get the new role and that you’re happy there and not upset by how irrelevant they find your job.

@smiley I made the request in April. School year runs September to September and I wanted to give a full terms notice for my request to improve chance of it being granted. The school plans timetable.for following academic year in the summer term so need to know who is doing what working pattern wise otherwise it becomes a living nightmare for.person who does timetable. It's a nightmare enough job as is without people chucking in last min flex work requests. I knew my DC was.receiving 30 free hours from September so I could make.my.request in plenty of time.

Thanks @roses. I don't think it's my job they find irrelevant- I think it's me ;)

You are still focussing on your own needs rather than meeting those of your employer. It happily suited them for you to return ft, but having done so the role is no longer available pt. When are you due back?

My argument for every single one of their reasons is simply that it worked well for 2.5 years. To refuse it now on basis it won't work well anymore is simply supposition and not based on factual evidence. They can cite post pandemic landscape etc but the role worked well part time during pandemic and in immediate after of it too. Perhaps offer a 3 or 6 month trial then review? I would be open to this.

The job share gave other staff second to none CPD at no extra cost. This then meant there were very capable people able to step in and cover maternity leaves when needed.

The job share did and will help retain a very experienced and established member of staff with an excellent track record of delivering great outcomes. This then saves on recruitment costs incurred by losing me to somewhere else more flexible. Right now good teachers are hard to come by.

Offering flex working for this role means they aren't making the role unavailable to those with carer commitments and therefore aren't disproportionately preventing women from working this role. As an employer not being guilty of indirect sex discrimination would be high on my list of things to avoid but that's just me...

The job share at 0.8 cost the employer no additional money. I would be open to 0.8 rather than 0.7 I initially requested.

I’m with your school on this I’m afraid. Children (and parents) need consistency.
If one of your year group, who you have built up a trusting relationship with, needs to talk to you - your deputy can’t necessarily fill that gap. They’re not the person they’ve built that connection with.

But you didn't ask for 0.8! However they seem to now say it has to be 1.0 which is the same role you left. They are not obliged to offer otherwise. Is there a reason ft cannot work for you now?